More handpicked essays just for you.
Plato and Aristotle on philosophy
Comparative analysis of Plato and Aristotle
The thoughts of Plato and Aristotle
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Plato and Aristotle on philosophy
The scholastic movement was an effort to incorporate reason and faith. Often referencing classical philosophical thought, those in the scholastic movement used the thinking of Plato, Aristotle and others to provide rational processes for explaining or reinforcing the existence of God. One major issue addressed by the scholastics was that of universals. Is truth an interpretation of our observations, or do these concepts exist independent of our observations? As the Scholastic theologians define the way people experience reality, they determine how faith and reason interact in our understanding of God.
Anselm was a forerunner of the Scholastic movement who initiated the idea that faith and intellect were compatible and not in conflict. As the Anselm was developing his thoughts, harsh punishments came to those who questioned God’s existence. Anselm’s approach was presented as a reinforcement of God’s existence as opposed to a response as to question of God’s existence. In this way, Anselm began with God as the greatest revelation of truth and used reason to demonstrate how all things f...
Saint Thomas of Aquainas may have been one of the greatest thinkers who attempted to bridge the proverbial gap between faith and reason. His Sacred Doctrine which was the initial part of his Summa Theologica was the basis for his conclusion about the existence of God. Aquinas tended to align his beliefs close with Aristotle's supposition that there must be an eternal and imputrescible creator. In comparison, Anselm's impressions were influenced largely by Plato. In his text Proslogion he outlined his Ontological argument that regarding the existence of God. It was simply that God was the ultimate and most perfect being conceivable, and that his state of existing is greater than not existing therefore god, being perfect in every way, must exist. This is where their paths divide, and although they essentially reach the same determination they paint the picture quite differently.
St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas were considered as some of the best in their period to represent philosophy. St. Anselm’s argument is known as the ontological argument; it revolves entirely around his statement, “God is that, than which no greater can be conceived” (The Great Conversation, Norman Melchert 260). St. Thomas Aquinas’ argument is known as the cosmological argument; it connects the effects of events to the cause for why they happened. Anselm’s ontological proof and Aquinas’ cosmological proof both argued for God’s existence, differed in the way they argued God’s existence, and had varying degrees of success using these proofs.
The Ontological Argument, which argues from a definition of God’s being to his existence, is the first type of argument we are going to examine. Since this argument was founded by Saint Anslem, we will be examining his writings. Saint Anslem starts by defining God as an all-perfect being, or rather as a being containing all conceivable perfections. Now if in addition of possessing all conceivable perfections t...
Anselm began with his definition of God. That God is “that then which nothing greater can be conceived” (Id quo nihil mauis potest), meaning that it is impossible for there to be a more perfect being. This leads to the first two premises. Firstly, “God is that then which nothing greater can be conceived” and secondly, “Something that exists in reality (in re) is bound to be greater than something that exists in the imagination (in intellectu). This leads to the conclusion, that as God is “the greatest conceivable thing”…it is only logical that God exists “both in reality and thought”. Anselm’s essential claim was that existence was a “predicate of God” which means a quality of God’s nature. As God is the “greatest conceivable thing”, He must be great in possible way which includes existing.
Anselm was a stable believer in God, so he wanted to use logic and reason to confirm his forceful faith and clarify God’s existence. Anselm’s argument was given in chapter two of Proslogion. Its main focus was the meaning of God. Furthermore he claims that everyone, whether they trust in God or not agrees alongside this definition. Anselm approves there is a difference amid understanding that God exists and understanding him to be a concept. To clarify this extra, he gives the analogy of a painter. He states that, in advance a gifted painter makes a masterpiece; he can discern it visibly in his mind even nevertheless he knows it doesn’t exist. He comprehends it as an idea. Though, after the painting has been finished and can be perceived by the man in reality, the painter comprehends the believed of the painting and its existence. The upcoming period is the locale that an advocate of God who approves alongside Anselm’s argument will be at.
There are often many mixed views when discussing God’s existence. In Anselm’s works “The Proslogion” and “Anselm’s Reply to Gaunilo” and Gaunilo’s work the “Reply on Behalf of the Fool”, both of their philosophies on the matter are imparted. Anselm’s logic regarding God is correct as he sustains his argument even when it confronted with criticisms and it is comprehensible.
Both 1984 and The Handmaid’s Tale are dystopian novels, however, these books are a lot more complex than mere portrayals of dystopia, it can be argued that they are explorations of dystopia rather than mere portrayals. In order to explore dystopia, many themes must be considered, such as; feminism, love and repression. Nonetheless, it is apparent that human characteristics are the driving point of the two novels, predominantly, the depiction of human resilience. In an imperfect world, it is important to have certain qualities which, if plentiful, it can mean success, whereas if it lacks, it can mean failure, this characteristic is resilience. The protagonists in each novel, Winston in 1984 and Offred in The Handmaid’s Tale face situations which leave them both in disarray, and both even consider suicide. The authors tentatively highlight human resilience, its limits and most importantly its strengths into the two novels.
The Hunger Games was a critically acclaimed movie when it came out; however, some critics would argue that the movie can be sometimes too violent for its intended audience. In this essay I would dissert Brian Bethune’s essay “Dystopia Now” in order to find its weaknesses and compare the movie Battle Royale with his essay.
“‘They score! Henderson has scored for Canada!’” Foster Hewitt wordlessly described” (Pelletier) when Paul Henderson scored the series-winning goal. This allowed Canada to win the 1972 Summit Series, a moment that no one would ever forget since it all happened during the climax of the Cold War. Prior to this, the Soviets had won the previous three Olympic gold metals since Canada could not use its NHL players. Thus, this provided Canada with the chance to play hockey against the USSR using its best players. This raised the question: if Canada were able to send its best players, would it still be enough to beat the Soviets? Everyone in Canada was certain that the Soviets would not win a single game, but little did they know they underestimated the extent of the Soviets abilities. Tied in the last few minutes of game eight, Canada had to score or they would lose the series. However, when Paul Henderson scored the game-winning goal, never before had a single sporting event meant so much to Canadians. Therefore, Paul Henderson’s goal is a defining moment for Canada in the twentieth century becauseit provided Canada with the opportunity to evolve hockey, proved that Canada and our democratic society were superior to the USSR and their communist society, and brought citizens together to unify Canada as a nation.
The 1960s was a period well remembered for all the civil rights movements that occurred during that time frame and the impact these movements had on the social and political dynamics of the United States. The three largest movements that were striving in the 1960s were the African American civil rights movement, the New Left movement and the feminist movement. These three movements were in a lot of ways influenced by each other and were very similar in terms of their goals and strategies. However, within each of these movements there were divisions in the way they tried to approach the issues they were fighting against. Looking at each of these movements individually will reveal the relationship they all share as well as the changes that were brought forth as a result of each groups actions.
Both Abelard and Aquinas were the two leading followers of scholastics of their time. Summa Theologica and Sic et Non, to this day, are controversial ways man has looked for reason in finding the truth about God and the divine order of life. The views on the "natural world" were challenged without challenging the Christian faith, while being followers of the Christian faith.
Pope John Paul II once said, “Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth – in a word, to know himself – so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves.” (Fallible Blogma) Based on this significant and powerful quote, one can infer that faith and reason are directly associated and related. It can also be implied that the combination of faith and reason allows one to seek information and knowledge about truth and God; based on various class discussions and past academic teachings, it is understood that both faith and reason are the instruments that diverse parties are supposed to use on this search for truth and God. There are many stances and viewpoints on the issues of faith and reason. Some believe that both of these ideas cannot and should not be combined; these parties deem that faith and reason must be taken as merely separate entities. However, this writer does not understand why both entities cannot be combined; both terms are so closely compatible that it would make sense to combine the two for a common task. Based on various class discussions and readings, there are many philosophers and theologians who have certain opinions regarding faith, reason and their compatibility; these philosophers include Hildegard of Bingen, Ibn Rushd, Moses Maimonides, and St. Thomas Aquinas. The following essay will examine each of the previously stated philosopher’s viewpoints on faith and reason, and will essentially try to determine whether or not faith and reason are ultimately one in the same.
"The Necklace," Guy de Maupassant effectively employs a very dreary mood, despondent character and a surprise ending to develop the idea that when an individual is overcome by greed, that person has an excessive desire to obtain material wealth to feel self sustained.
Anselm’s argument for the existence of God is quite simple. He first proclaims that humans can grasp in their mind “something than which nothing greater can be thought” (Anselm 7). This “something” is an all-perfect God. Then, Anselm states that, if the all-perfect God existed only in thought, then something greater than the the all-perfect God can be conceived, namely, an all-perfect God that exists in reality. And
The Middle Ages saw a period in time that was deeply rooted in Christianity. Almost every aspect of life was monitered and ruled by the Church. This period in time also saw the emergence of men beginning to question whether the existence of God can be proved by faith , reason, or as Thomas Aquinas insists, by both faith and reason. There were differing opinions of this matter in both scholarly and religious circles. Faith is what all believers must have within them, it is a crucial part of man’s relationship with God. On the other hand, reason is a part of science and some believed that matters of The Divine should not be subjected to reason; there should not be a justification for God.